Blógünder Schlock

Thanks for all the cool links, everybody. Not only have you pounded on the previous thread with great information, some of you have also emailed me assorted goodies. It is interesting to note that I’ve also not received even a SINGLE anti-RPG/anti-D&D flame. Apparently the gravitics of Schlockiverse technology allow me to fly under the radar of The Evil Legion of Attack Ministries™. (I’ll just drop this payload and be on my way…)

If you’ve emailed me, you may get a personalized response, but you also might not. Let me say, however, that pretty much ALL the email I have gotten on the subject was useful (yes, even yours. Don’t be so humble. It was brilliant.)

I will be compiling a link-list and making it permanently available on this site. I’ll also write a little essay of my own on the subject. These things may have to wait a little while, though, because books are due to arrive Any Day Now, and when they do I’ll be suddenly, suddenly busy.

Which reminds me: pre-orders will be closing sometime on Tuesday, November 14th. If you want your book to ship before Thanksgiving (that Great American Celebration of Plenitude, Omnivorism, and Excess), please place your order now. Operators Web-servers are standing by.

I need your webhounding skills, but we’ll get to that in a moment.

Twice in the last week, as I’ve been sitting at my drawing table at Dragons Keep, customers have come in asking, in essence, “what’s all the fuss about D&D?” Specifically, it seems, they want to know why other parents are dead-set against letting their children play such an insidiously dangerous game, which is obviously training them for occultism, satanism, and weekend baby-eating.

And here I thought those issues all got put to bed back in, oh, 1983. D&D is no more a training ground for occultists, satanists, and baby-eaters than American Idol is (note: I use “American Idol” as my example rather than “Survivor” because, well… the baby-eating episode of “Survivor” is going to air any day now).

Still, people have questions. As the closest thing to an actual grown-up present in the store (being in the store prevents me, by definition, from being a TRUE grown-up) it seems to fall on me to answer their questions.

While I can be fairly encyclopedic in my summonings of obscure and arcane trivia, I suspect that when Mrs. Smith tells Mrs. Jones “the guy drawing stuff at the comic book store said it’s okay because…” all of my pontificating will fall rather flat in the retelling.

So… do you know any good sites with TRULY encyclopedic advocacy for Dungeons & Dragons in specific, and Fantasy Role-Playing in general?

I’m looking for something I can summarize, synopsize, and print out — complete with links and footnotes — so that the next time someone asks the question I can say “D&D is as safe as any other activity that takes place at your kitchen table” and then hand them a nice sheet of paper that allows them to refute the absurd allegations bandied about by their ignorant and fearful neighbors.

I’ve found a little material already, but I’m sure there are things I’m missing… like perhaps an under-utilized, low-Google-ranked site that already has EXACTLY what I want, formatted and ready to go.

Failing that, send me the raw feed. On your mark, get set, roll initiative…

I need to see this film two or three more times. Only then can I write the review it deserves, but that wouldn’t be a review — it would be critical analysis, bordering perhaps on deconstruction.

One thing is certain: this film falls far outside the typical range for comic-book movies. It’s not your garden-variety action flick, either. It’s deep. Deep and dark. Like a well… one that you’re staring up out of from the bottom, not peering into from the top.

The story is simple: a masked man is taking on a totalitarian regime, and enlists the unsuspecting help of a beautiful young woman. During the single year of the story they are both changed. Lots of people are killed. At the end of the film there is stuff blowing up.

Beneath that simple layer there are piles of backstory, political and religious commentary, and plenty of very artistic dialog. There is symbolism and there is satire. Even the music in the film is laden with meaning. There is probably an English Major’s thesis paper waiting to be written about this film.

Did I like it? Yes. Did I agree with the message of the film? I’m going to hedge… I believe that the film is actually ambiguous enough on the delivery of its messages that the viewer can come away with reinforcement of whatever belief he or she went in with. That said… I agree with some of what was presented.

This is a film you need to see with a group of thinking friends, and after you see it you need to go sit down someplace and talk about what you saw. Engage in a critical discourse. ARGUE.

It’s possible that’s the message of the film right there. But then again, that’s a value I went into the theater with, and I came out with it reinforced.

Y’all may recall my post a month or so ago entitled Evolution, Intelligent Design, and Me. In it I stated that as a Christian who believes God created the Earth, I am opposed to teaching “Intelligent Design,” because it’s not very good science and it’s lying about itself when it claims to not be religion.

Well, the head-banging in Pennsylvania is being echoed here in the great State of Utah. (more…)

Well, that’s it for the first half of the aughts. In another four years we’ll be putting aught-nine to rest, and we can FINALLY have a decade that people can refer to without using antiquated nomenclature (except for those people who regularly shop for ammunition, for whom 30.06 is pronounced thirty-aught-six, and who might object to “aught” being called antiquated.) We’re halfway to the tens! Granted, as a decade goes, even the tens will sound pretty lame compared with the two-syllable decades like the twenties.

I wonder if our next trip through the seventies will be better than the last one. Are all three-syllable decades doomed? Does anyone here have an opinion about the 1870s? (more…)

All this fuss over what to say to people at Christmas is a little silly. Sure, it would be disheartening to see political correctness taken to the point that “Merry Christmas” becomes a taboo phrase, but I don’t see “Happy Holidays” as the byline of the Anti-Christ. I’m pleased when someone greets me with a genuine wish that I might have more joy, regardless of the words they use. I don’t mind when a retail wage-slave reflexively recites something seasonal — at least not any more than I mind their mechanical mandate that I “have a nice day.” It gives me the opportunity to pause, reflect, and then wish them something appropriate.

This time of year you can get a smile with the response “Hang in there. Only (n) shopping days until Christmas, and I bet hardly ANYBODY will return stuff this year.”

There are those, of course, who will take offense at “Merry Christmas” AND “Happy Holidays.” Usually these are people whose own belief system doesn’t advocate any sort of holy day during this season, but sometimes they’re just grumpy people. Having been grumpy myself once or twice, I know where they’re coming from. And as a writer whose global audience almost certainly includes at least a couple of these people, I’m led to ponder what kind of greeting I could offer, what kind of message I could post that would be appropriate, inoffensive, and yet full of meaning.

I think I’ve found one. Worshippers of Christ will find it timely, and will see it as a reminder of who they are and what they should be about. Those familiar with the Christian message will certainly recognize it, but will find it difficult to argue with. Those unfamiliar with the lore of the season may wonder a bit at the wording, but will have a difficult time arguing with the sentiment.

And so it is that I hope you all enjoy peace on Earth, good will toward men.

(Uh-oh. I think I may have offended an entire camp of feminists. Is it too late for me to change “men” to “humans?”)

(And… here comes PETA, right on cue. I give up.)

I’m glad to see that a Federal Judge has ruled against teaching “Intelligent Design” in Pennsylvania biology classes. Intelligent Design is not science - not even BAD science - but it is bad religion. After all, any religion that has to lie about what it is in order to sneak into the building needs to take a long hard look at some of its own tenets regarding morality and integrity.

Now, before my religious friends lynch me… I believe that God created Heaven and Earth, and that His explanation of HOW he did it, as revealed to prophets throughout the ages, is about as complete as He needs it to be. More divine revelation as to His Methods and Means would not make any of us mortals more faithful. After all, most of us pay little enough attention to the revelations that have already been given. (more…)

I saw The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe Friday morning, and I loved it. This is a film I’ve already added to my list of “things we must eventually own,” but if you want to fully appreciate it, don’t wait for DVD. Aslan’s roar, among other things, is best appreciated when emanating from a dozen big speakers surrounding an audience full of wide-eyed mortals.

If you’ve never read the C.S. Lewis book from which the movie is drawn, you may want to not read further, because it’s very difficult to discuss Lewis’ work without spoiling at least SOME of it — especially for those already familiar with the archetypes found in the Christian mythos.

For the record, when I read The Chronicles of Narnia (all seven books) in grade-school, I enjoyed them fully, and the allegorical parallels to Christianity were completely lost on me. You CAN go into these books and this film with no religious background and not feel like you’re being preached to. For the believer, however, the allegory will underscore certain aspects of your belief, inviting you to further contemplate the mysteries, miracles, and manifestations of repentance, atonement, and forgiveness.

Whether or not you believe as I do, that Jesus Christ died and lived again to make eternal forgiveness possible for each of us, you’ll probably agree that the themes of forgiveness and personal sacrifice are worthy ones. The world could use a whole lot more of them. I really don’t want to spook the non-Christians among my readers — you folks will enjoy this film a lot.

But so far I’ve talked about the allegorical aspect, which, when you get right down to it, is not why most of us go to see movies. I know it’s not why I go see movies, at any rate. I like escapist entertainment, and The Chronicles of Narnia delivers this in spades. Four children between the ages of (I’m guessing here) six and sixteen are evacuated from London along with thousands of others during the Blitz, and end up staying with “the Professor” and his very narrow-minded housekeeper. The kids are bored, frightened, lonely, and homesick in turn, and then a doorway opens up to the magical world of Narnia.

Escapism — see?

In order to pull it off, the filmmakers have to resort to lots of effects, and while there were a few that didn’t work well for me, that’s because I’m the kind of butthead who goes into movies looking for the “seams.” If you don’t look for them, they won’t jump out at you. Mr. Tumnus is a Faun, with unguligrade legs (walks on hooves, like a horse, with what looks like “backwards” knees*), and if you just ACCEPT that, and stop trying to find the point at which actor James McAvoy stops, and the CGI starts, you’ll be happier. Especially since it’s hard to find that particular seam. It’s DISTRACTING. Cut that out. Watch. The. Movie.

More important than the effects, however, is the acting. The actors playing the children did a fine job. Georgie Henley, who plays the youngest girl Lucy, was magnificent. She was cute, she was innocent, she was THIS close to having a tantrum… and it didn’t look like “acting.” No seams. It just WAS. And the others weren’t a whit behind her. Edmund looked grouchy and scared. Susan was “thinky” and disbelieving. Peter was bossy and in over his head.

In the battle sequences, Edmund and Peter in armor looked like kids in armor. They didn’t magically become battle-ready, child-prodigy warlords. They had greatness thrust upon them, and the shoes were too big. If you’ve got kids of your own, or if you ARE a kid, this is both terrifying and exhilarating. And there weren’t any seams.

Probably the finest bit of seamlessness, however, was the creation of Aslan and Mr. and Mrs. Beaver. These were the best “talking animals” I’ve ever seen on film. No seams at all — they just WERE talking animals. Liam Neeson voiced Aslan, and I’m forever grateful that he has now been cast in an infinitely better”mentor” and “father-figure” role than that “Episode I” part upon which his talents were wasted. Aslan, after all, is EFFECTIVE.

If you have children, I believe this movie is quite safe for them to watch. The battle sequences are bloodless (there’s a lot of crashing around, and it’s quite furious, but this is NOT Kingdom of Heaven or Henry the Fifth) and while there’s a lot of peril, there’s a happy ending. Also, the kids in the story snap and argue and fight like siblings, but they also show love for each other, and pull together in ways we can only hope our own children will.

See it in theaters, and take your children. (Moment of hypocrisy: I’ll be taking only my oldest to see this in the theater. The 2nd oldest is terrified of big, loud theaters, the 5-ish-year-old can’t sit still to save her life, and the 3-year-old is THREE, for crying out loud.) Oh, and if you don’t already have the books, it’s not too late to order The Chronicles of Narnia** from Amazon for your kids (and yourself!) for Christmas. I’ve located our family’s copies, and will be re-reading the series now for the first time since I was 13 years old.

*Note: The “knees” you think you see going backwards on unguligrade legs are actually ankles. The REAL knee is higher up, and bends forwards, just like yours. Here’s a picture, courtesy of Animal Diversity Web.

**Another Note: The “Adult Edition” of The Chronicles of Narnia includes some explanatory essays, and is what I’ve linked above. The text of the stories remains unchanged. If you want JUST the stories, no commentary thank-you-very-much, a less expensive edition can be found here.

***And Yet Another Note: Students of literary criticism will no doubt take issue with my bandying about of the term “allegory” when discussing The Chronicles of Narnia. C.S. Lewis himself took issue with that, because in an allegory there is a one-to-one “mapping” of fiction to principle, and any such mapping attempt will fail between The Chronicles of Narnia and Christian canon. Lewis used the word “supposal” to describe what he was doing:

“I don’t say. ‘Let us represent Christ as Aslan.’ I say, ‘Supposing there was a world like Narnia, and supposing, like ours, it needed redemption, let us imagine what sort of Incarnation and Passion and Resurrection Christ would have there.’” — C.S. Lewis

This is all well and good, but for two things:

1. Within the context of the supposal, there are story elements which ARE allegorical, and where a one-to-one mapping succeeds. Thus, there are allegories within the overarching story. A book need not be a cover-to-cover allegory in order to CONTAIN allegories.
2. The lay reader won’t know a supposal from a suppository. Any review written for lay readers must use colloquial terminology, pedantic ire notwithstanding. Hence I say “allegory.”